It was a day of wild hypotheticals Tuesday, as the U.S. Supreme Court reached far and wide for help in deciding whether a federal law that makes it a crime to depict animal cruelty violates the First Amendment. By the end of the riveting hour of argument in United States v. Stevens, it seemed likely that a sizable majority of the Court was ready to strike down the law as too broad or too vague.
Hypotheticals dominate animal cruelty argument
The National Law Journal
October 6, 2009
This content is now available at LexisNexis®.
The ALM® and LexisNexis® Content Alliance
LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM’s legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM’s content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM’s other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.
ALM’s content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.
If you are not currently a LexisNexis subscriber, contact 1-800-227-4908 to find out more or click here to have a customer representative contact you directly.